[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140901001525.GC25599@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:15:26 +0900
From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
To: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei@...fujitsu.com>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>,
Heesub Shin <heesub.shin@...sung.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@...il.com>,
t.stanislaws@...sung.com, Gioh Kim <gioh.kim@....com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 4/4] mm/page_alloc: restrict max order of merging
on isolated pageblock
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:52:44PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> Hi Joonsoo,
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 05:08:18PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > Current pageblock isolation logic could isolate each pageblock
> > individually. This causes freepage accounting problem if freepage with
> > pageblock order on isolate pageblock is merged with other freepage on
> > normal pageblock. We can prevent merging by restricting max order of
> > merging to pageblock order if freepage is on isolate pageblock.
> >
> > Side-effect of this change is that there could be non-merged buddy
> > freepage even if finishing pageblock isolation, because undoing pageblock
> > isolation is just to move freepage from isolate buddy list to normal buddy
> > list rather than to consider merging. But, I think it doesn't matter
> > because 1) almost allocation request are for equal or below pageblock
> > order, 2) caller of pageblock isolation will use this freepage so
> > freepage will split in any case and 3) merge would happen soon after
> > some alloc/free on this and buddy pageblock.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
> > ---
> > mm/page_alloc.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > index 809bfd3..8ba9fb0 100644
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -570,6 +570,7 @@ static inline void __free_one_page(struct page *page,
> > unsigned long combined_idx;
> > unsigned long uninitialized_var(buddy_idx);
> > struct page *buddy;
> > + int max_order = MAX_ORDER;
> >
> > VM_BUG_ON(!zone_is_initialized(zone));
> >
> > @@ -580,18 +581,26 @@ static inline void __free_one_page(struct page *page,
> > VM_BUG_ON(migratetype == -1);
> > if (unlikely(has_isolate_pageblock(zone))) {
> > migratetype = get_pfnblock_migratetype(page, pfn);
> > - if (is_migrate_isolate(migratetype))
> > + if (is_migrate_isolate(migratetype)) {
> > + /*
> > + * We restrict max order of merging to prevent merge
> > + * between freepages on isolate pageblock and normal
> > + * pageblock. Without this, pageblock isolation
> > + * could cause incorrect freepage accounting.
> > + */
> > + max_order = pageblock_order + 1;
>
> When pageblock_order >= max_order, order in the while loop below could
> go beyond MAX_ORDER - 1. Or does it never happen?
Yes, you are right. Will fix it in next spin.
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists